Experiments in Visual Analysis: (Re)positionings of children and youth in relation to Larger Sociocultural Issues

dc.contributor.authorKendrick, Maureen
dc.contributor.authorRogers, Theresa
dc.contributor.authorToohey, Kelleen
dc.contributor.authorMarshall, Elizabeth
dc.contributor.authorMutonyi, Harriet
dc.contributor.authorHauge, Chelsey
dc.contributor.authorSiegel, Marjorie
dc.contributor.authorRowsell, Jennifer
dc.date.accessioned2018-08-01T07:23:38Z
dc.date.available2018-08-01T07:23:38Z
dc.date.issued2007
dc.description.abstractOne of the most distinctive features of the 21st Century is the dominance of the visual and its relationship to multiple modalities of communication. Human experience is more visual and visualized than ever before (Mirzoeff, 1999). Visual communication is becoming less the domain of specialists, and more and more crucial in the domains of public communication (Kress & van Leeuwen, 1996), particularly as dominant modes of communication shift from page to screen (Snyder, 1997). Generating information about children’s and youth’s knowledge, and perceptions of their own lives and learning typically involves language-based modes, which may not build access to the multiple layers and complexities of their knowing. Visual representations have been utilized by researchers in various fields such as psychology and anthropology to learn more about participants’ constructions of their worlds (e.g., Adler, 1982; Diem-Wille, 2001; Koppitz, 1984). Siegel and Panofsky argue literacy studies have taken a semiotic turn: “the unsettled status of the field appears to be a productive moment of experimentation, invention, and problem-posing as researchers design analytic approaches that draw on a range of theoretical frameworks relevant to their research interests, purposes, and questions... analyzing multimodality requires a hybrid approach—a blend or ‘mash-up’ of theories” (2009, p. 99). Similarly, Pahl and Rowsell assert that, in accessing the underlying meanings of multimodal practices, “we need not only to account for the materiality of the texts, that is, the way they look, sound, and feel, but also have an understanding of who made the text, why, where, and when” (2006, p. 2).en_US
dc.identifier.citationKendrick, M., Rogers, T., Toohey, K., Marshall, E., Mutonyi, H., Hauge, C. and Rowsell, J., 2010. Experiments in visual analysis:(Re) positionings of children and youth in relation to larger sociocultural issues. In 59th National Reading Conference Yearbook (pp. 395-408).en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12280/568
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.subjectExperiments in Visual Analysisen_US
dc.subject(Re)positionings of childrenen_US
dc.subjectyouth in relation to Larger Sociocultural Issuesen_US
dc.titleExperiments in Visual Analysis: (Re)positionings of children and youth in relation to Larger Sociocultural Issuesen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Mutonyi_EDUC_Article_Experiments_2011.pdf
Size:
799.15 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.71 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: